Graphics card manufacturer NVIDIA is being sued for withholding information over defect GPUs and thus causing investors to lose money. NVIDIA shareholder Lisa Miller has filed the suit in the US district, seeking for legal action against NVIDIA. The lawsuit alleges that the company knew of the problem last year, but didn't disclose the issue to shareholders. Earlier this summer NVIDIA by its own admitted that it had a problem with faulty GPUs indeed. In July NVIDIA confirmed that there's a thermal problem with its GPUs. The problem is in the thermal stress caused when the chip powers up and then powers down. The difference in temperature caused the solder attaching the chips to crack and fail. After the issue was made public it led to an immediate stock reaction. The company's share price fell 31% from $18.78 USD to $12.98 for one night, effectively wiping $3 billion off the company's and shareholders' pockets in less than 24 hours. If NVIDIA tries to cover the cost of repairs and returns for the faulty GPUs, it would cost up to $200 million. Because of the obvious losses, the shareholders now want some compensation that needs to be paid by NVIDIA. "The truth is that, at least as early as November 2007, NVIDIA and the other defendants have known about these unprecedented failure rates as well as their 'root causes'," the lawsuit claims. "Nevertheless, for at least eight months, defendants concealed from NVIDIA investors these defects and their obvious impact on the company's financial condition and future business prospects," it adds. Till the moment of this release, there is still no official response from NVIDIA. You can find the full lawsuit in .pdf format here.

Same here. The only Nvidia chips ive killed where by me and stupidity other than manufacturer fault. Laptops are generaly hotter than PCs anyways because of the compactness so it makes sense that laptops would indeed have the problem more.

People are so "sue" happy these days...Stocks rise and fall with companies everyday...now a stockholder(s) wants to sue them? She and the "others" knew the so called risks involved with buying stock. Now she's throwing a fit because things aren't going the way she and her cronies planned? Because there was a defect? A defect that Nvidia admitted to and didn't deny...A defect that was traced to manufacturer's error if memory serves me correctly...Why not sue that factory? Hey folks, here's a little flash for ya..DEFECTS HAPPEN!! ..I'm no "fanboy", it just that it makes me sick how many lawsuits are filed at the drop of a dime by people looking for a window of opportunity to make someones error a means and excuse to empty their pockets..:shadedshu..Pricks

People are so "sue" happy these days...Stocks rise and fall with companies everyday...now a stockholder(s) wants to sue them? She and the "others" knew the so called risks involved with buying stock. Now she's throwing a fit because things aren't going the way she and her cronies planned? Because there was a defect? A defect that Nvidia admitted to and didn't deny...A defect that was traced to manufacturer's error if memory serves me correctly...Why not sue that factory? Hey folks, here's a little flash for ya..DEFECTS HAPPEN!! ..I'm no "fanboy", it just that it makes me sick how many lawsuits are filed at the drop of a dime by people looking for a window of opportunity to make someones error a means and excuse to empty their pockets..:shadedshu..Pricks

Click to expand...

Have to agree with you there. But remember it's the lawyers that initiate this stuff. Remember that they take a BIG slice of any legal action.

This sets a terrible precedence if upheld in court. Why?

1./ nVidia might have observed SOME small issue, but did not know the scale until REAL DATA came their way... ie. after months of use. You cannot reproach them for WAITING until the data arrived before taking a view

2./ Do we want companies to report EVERY SINGLE SMALL ISSUE to shareholders just in case one of them might get nasty a year later. Can you imagine the thousands, and I mean thousands, of potential "operating risks" that would need to be reported? For example, a person leaves the company, that person was on an R&D project, and the consequence is that a new undisclosed product launch might be delayed a few months, which means the company loses out on a fewmonths of income, which therefore affects profits... OMG

3./ Are we making nVidia liable to monitor and quality control the coldering technology used by OEM production lines? Would a higher grade solder and/or solder robot machine have resulted in loess failures. Whose problem is that? Not nVidia's surely.

4./ Can nVidia SUE THE HELL out of governments around the world for implementing RoHS... the consequence of which means soldering technologies are not as good.

5./ If an invester is in stock and the stock goes down then cry baby cry. If you dont want your investments to be at risk of going down as well as up then dont buy stock. Put your money in the bank on depost, or get a govt bond.

6./ This particular investor and her lawyers should be countersued for wasting the company and the court's time.

2. Post the same thing after having lost serious amounts of money on shares.

3. The person seeks compensation and not "her money back". Interestingly, compensation would again mean NV shelling cash out from its coffers (and depreciating share value further). So the person is seeking a lower share value? wtf: ?)

4. So you deduced it's a "sue happy" spoilt xxx... and not an abstract person in destress for having lost money? Difference being?

5. Sure every section of the manufacturing process is outsourced, such as in this case, where bump-processing contracts were given to 3 companies, but the end product and its defects are sole liability of the Manufacturer, in this case, NVIDIA.

5. Sure every section of the manufacturing process is outsourced, such as in this case, where bump-processing contracts were given to 3 companies, but the end product and its defects are sole liability of the Manufacturer, in this case, NVIDIA.

Click to expand...

I'm not 100% sure about that. If nV sell just the chips to some other product manufacturer to install in, say, an IBM or SONY laptop (random examples), then if they didnt solder the component properly, why would it be nV's fault?

If nV subcontracts an OEM to produce an nV branded and boxed product, then OK, since nV sells the end product.

Consider an analogy. If AMG supplies some nice alloy wheels for a top end sportscars, but the car manufacturer doesnt screw the wheels on properly, who is at fault?

I'm not 100% sure about that. If nV sell just the chips to some other product manufacturer to install in, say, an IBM or SONY laptop (random examples), then if they didnt solder the component properly, why would it be nV's fault?